.30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
10-11-2009, 02:49 AM
#26
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
I must confess that I get very little sense of pride from just slapping together a kit just so I can have a model to fly. Gluing balsa is nothing special. Now on the other hand, if I really want to pour my heart and soul into a model, I'm going to be doing more than just "put a kit together." But, honestly, I'd rather have a nice looking ARF than a self-built 4*40.
10-11-2009, 08:56 AM
#27
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Abbotsford,
BC, CANADA
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
I had a Magnum .30 four stroke in my T-craft, and it was a great combination. It's a really reliable engine, and has a reasonable amount of power. I can't compare it to the OS for power, but I was happy with it. You don't need to worry about carrying a different bottle of fuel with you either, you won't do the engine any harm with an average sport fuel. Four-stroke fuel has less oil anyways, not more.
10-11-2009, 10:07 AM
#28
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
ORIGINAL: Boomerang1
Unfortunately many people will justify the ARF's on the basis of them being cheaper than a kit plus the goodies needed to finish them.
They put no value whatsoever on the hours of enjoyable work actually building something. I suppose their pride is different, they take pride in just owning something rather than taking pride in creating something. I have a couple of ARF's but they leave me feeling a little empty, unlike something I build which gives me a sense of achievement every time I fly one. - John.
Unfortunately many people will justify the ARF's on the basis of them being cheaper than a kit plus the goodies needed to finish them.
They put no value whatsoever on the hours of enjoyable work actually building something. I suppose their pride is different, they take pride in just owning something rather than taking pride in creating something. I have a couple of ARF's but they leave me feeling a little empty, unlike something I build which gives me a sense of achievement every time I fly one. - John.
10-11-2009, 11:03 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: College Park,
MD
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
About the Magnum 30 vs the OS 30, a buddy and I both got the Hyperion Hayate 25e and he put a Magnum 30 into the plane and I an OS 30. The difference in power was significant, my Hayate got elevator futter and his was hardly able to fly.To catch up with the OS the Magnum overheated (adjustment to lean). That was very funny. Actually, the Magnum can not turn the same prop as the OS 30. According to the spec sheets the OS has 0,5HP and the Magnum 0,45HP.
To sum up, the OS 30 is a sweet little engine but you should also look at the Saito 40. The Magnum on the other hand is rather on the level of the old OS26.
To sum up, the OS 30 is a sweet little engine but you should also look at the Saito 40. The Magnum on the other hand is rather on the level of the old OS26.
10-11-2009, 09:51 PM
#31
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
The reason, it is possible to use less oil, is because the oil that makes it into the crankcase is not consumed. With 2 strokes, the oil in the fuel is only passing by bearings as it is going to be carried along to go out the exhaust. What oil makes it into the crank case in the 4 stroke stays in the crankcase to be used until it is ejected out the drain; it accumulates. With some using high amounts of nitro, the extra oil is a buffer from problems, but one of the original selling points of the first OS 4 stroke was it could use 10% oil for the haters of oily planes.
10-12-2009, 12:12 AM
#32
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
ORIGINAL: TFF
The reason, it is possible to use less oil, is because the oil that makes it into the crankcase is not consumed. With 2 strokes, the oil in the fuel is only passing by bearings as it is going to be carried along to go out the exhaust. What oil makes it into the crank case in the 4 stroke stays in the crankcase to be used until it is ejected out the drain; it accumulates. With some using high amounts of nitro, the extra oil is a buffer from problems, but one of the original selling points of the first OS 4 stroke was it could use 10% oil for the haters of oily planes.
The reason, it is possible to use less oil, is because the oil that makes it into the crankcase is not consumed. With 2 strokes, the oil in the fuel is only passing by bearings as it is going to be carried along to go out the exhaust. What oil makes it into the crank case in the 4 stroke stays in the crankcase to be used until it is ejected out the drain; it accumulates. With some using high amounts of nitro, the extra oil is a buffer from problems, but one of the original selling points of the first OS 4 stroke was it could use 10% oil for the haters of oily planes.
10-12-2009, 10:32 AM
#33
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
Happy B day!
In the beginning, 4 strokes were for the old guys who wanted to putt around with a big trainer; now they are high performance engines. Saito wants higher oil because most users are dumping a bunch of nitro in the engine to get the most power for the least amount of weight. What you are up against is the technology of the product vs. what everybody does; and although I like the technology do I try to prove it all the time? No, I buy regular 10% sport fuel and all my engines get it except one YS, so I play it safe and follow the leader. And for the people with the money for a new YS 170 ignition engine they are trying to drop the oil content of the fuel for more performance, as once the oil gets to the combustion chamber it becomes a "contaminant" because it does not add power and displaces the nitro/methanol that could be there to burn in its place.
In the beginning, 4 strokes were for the old guys who wanted to putt around with a big trainer; now they are high performance engines. Saito wants higher oil because most users are dumping a bunch of nitro in the engine to get the most power for the least amount of weight. What you are up against is the technology of the product vs. what everybody does; and although I like the technology do I try to prove it all the time? No, I buy regular 10% sport fuel and all my engines get it except one YS, so I play it safe and follow the leader. And for the people with the money for a new YS 170 ignition engine they are trying to drop the oil content of the fuel for more performance, as once the oil gets to the combustion chamber it becomes a "contaminant" because it does not add power and displaces the nitro/methanol that could be there to burn in its place.
10-12-2009, 08:42 PM
#36
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Abbotsford,
BC, CANADA
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
ORIGINAL: Pippin
About the Magnum 30 vs the OS 30, a buddy and I both got the Hyperion Hayate 25e and he put a Magnum 30 into the plane and I an OS 30. The difference in power was significant, my Hayate got elevator futter and his was hardly able to fly.To catch up with the OS the Magnum overheated (adjustment to lean). That was very funny. Actually, the Magnum can not turn the same prop as the OS 30. According to the spec sheets the OS has 0,5HP and the Magnum 0,45HP.
To sum up, the OS 30 is a sweet little engine but you should also look at the Saito 40. The Magnum on the other hand is rather on the level of the old OS26.
About the Magnum 30 vs the OS 30, a buddy and I both got the Hyperion Hayate 25e and he put a Magnum 30 into the plane and I an OS 30. The difference in power was significant, my Hayate got elevator futter and his was hardly able to fly.To catch up with the OS the Magnum overheated (adjustment to lean). That was very funny. Actually, the Magnum can not turn the same prop as the OS 30. According to the spec sheets the OS has 0,5HP and the Magnum 0,45HP.
To sum up, the OS 30 is a sweet little engine but you should also look at the Saito 40. The Magnum on the other hand is rather on the level of the old OS26.
What props were you spinning on the two of them?
10-20-2009, 03:09 AM
#37
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
I finally found that article on the tiny Japanese 4-stroke. It's from a small company called Micro Wings and is a 15-class engine with a "supercharger." This is from the August 2009 issue of Rajicon Gijutsu but my friend who has one says they may already be out of business.
10-20-2009, 01:17 PM
#38
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
HP also has that little .21 with internal valves, no pushrods. Always heard they were not very strong. They also made a .49. I think these are shown at the Mecoa site. I am sure availability would be rough though.
Here you go, they show them in stock! http://www.mecoa.com/hp/vt/21.htm
Here you go, they show them in stock! http://www.mecoa.com/hp/vt/21.htm
10-20-2009, 01:40 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Jonkoping, SWEDEN
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
Small .26-.30 Saito and OS four-stroke engines are my favourite engines. They are frugal on fuel, doesn't make much noise and provides about the same power as you would expect from a similar size OS FP or LA engine.
I have a SIG 71" Cub that is powered by an OS 26FS using a 10x5 APC propeller. It is built light and flies very similar to a full-size Cub. Admittedly it is sensitive to strong wind gusts, but that's a price I am willing to pay in order to be able to fly around like bumble bee at low altitude during calm evenings. Even though a small capacity engine is used I seldom use more than half-throttle during flight.
I have a SIG 71" Cub that is powered by an OS 26FS using a 10x5 APC propeller. It is built light and flies very similar to a full-size Cub. Admittedly it is sensitive to strong wind gusts, but that's a price I am willing to pay in order to be able to fly around like bumble bee at low altitude during calm evenings. Even though a small capacity engine is used I seldom use more than half-throttle during flight.
10-25-2009, 11:00 AM
#40
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
I agree with Red, those little four strokes are great fun and they make very useful power on 10 inch props. The sound is so appealing that it makes the whole flying experience more enjoyable. I swear they make me fly better because they have such a calming effect.
That TF DC-3 flying on 26s is just awesome and I'm sure it is much more realistic in flight than heavier versions with usual larger engines.
Jim
That TF DC-3 flying on 26s is just awesome and I'm sure it is much more realistic in flight than heavier versions with usual larger engines.
Jim
10-25-2009, 11:53 AM
#41
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
I have an old timer (Buzzard Bombshell) with a Magnum .30 four stroke. It's great fun just to cruise around at low altitude, do very slow fly-by's and touch and goes on a dead calm day.
I was telling a couple of club members that I'd like to make another old timer with an electric motor. They said "don't do it, we like to watch your plane and hear the putt-putt of that little four stroke." So even though it's a messy clean-up after each flying session, I'm going to stick with a four stroke for my next one.
I was telling a couple of club members that I'd like to make another old timer with an electric motor. They said "don't do it, we like to watch your plane and hear the putt-putt of that little four stroke." So even though it's a messy clean-up after each flying session, I'm going to stick with a four stroke for my next one.
06-15-2010, 03:49 PM
#42
Senior Member
My Feedback: (50)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mira Mesa, CA
Posts: 5,405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
Cool beans! Here is a picture of my dad and his "Playboy" when it was first built 25 years ago with an electric motor (Astro-05 I think).
My dad is 85 and has retired from flying but I modified it for an OS-26FS and it still flies today in his honor!
When we used to fly right until dark he used to say that it was a "nice sun-down ceremony", so I fly at dusk and think of my dad....
Good stuff!
My dad is 85 and has retired from flying but I modified it for an OS-26FS and it still flies today in his honor!
When we used to fly right until dark he used to say that it was a "nice sun-down ceremony", so I fly at dusk and think of my dad....
Good stuff!
08-01-2011, 05:55 PM
#44
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
That .52 may be a little much. Mine flies great with the .30, plus
You will be flying it mostly at or near idle. However, I did have to add weight to the nose, so the weight may as well be engine.
Not at home right now. Will post cg later. Should be on plan, don't you have it?
You will be flying it mostly at or near idle. However, I did have to add weight to the nose, so the weight may as well be engine.
Not at home right now. Will post cg later. Should be on plan, don't you have it?
08-02-2011, 06:09 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Louisa,
VA
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
I have to echo some of the anti-Magnum sentiment elucidated in some earlier posts. I'd recommend anything OS....and probably Saito though I have no experience with Saitos. I got a Magnum 52 I believe, a short while back to stick in a scale project. That thing was nothing but a headache, less power than the Os...less reliability, it'd always wet itself just to get started, (and the engine compartment to boot), and after sending it back to the company and having them "look it over" they sent it back saying this was all normal operating proceedure.....not to mention they added, "it prefers to be power started". Translation....this motor will NEVER start by hand. amazing. Paid a little more, got an OS 52 4 stroke....all problems dissappeared. What a great engine, and I'm sure its' smaller brethren are just as good.
my 2 cents
ZZ. ; )
my 2 cents
ZZ. ; )
08-15-2011, 06:51 AM
#46
RE: .30 or smaller 4 stroke engine?
Sorry - I forgot about the cg for the Bombshell. The plan shows it 4" behind the leading edge and that's where I have it on mine.
If I build another of these, or any other free flight converted to rc, I will reduce the dihedral quite a bit. Most of these were meant to be hand launched and they are quite squirrely to take off in grass. I believe this is due to the unequal drag on the wheels caused by irregularities in the grass causing yaw and therefor unequal angle of attack/lift on the wings. Less dihedral would reduce this problem. Since we can control the plane in flight, less dihedral is necessary. Anyway, I'm going to try it in my next one or may just build another wing for the Bombshell I have.
If I build another of these, or any other free flight converted to rc, I will reduce the dihedral quite a bit. Most of these were meant to be hand launched and they are quite squirrely to take off in grass. I believe this is due to the unequal drag on the wheels caused by irregularities in the grass causing yaw and therefor unequal angle of attack/lift on the wings. Less dihedral would reduce this problem. Since we can control the plane in flight, less dihedral is necessary. Anyway, I'm going to try it in my next one or may just build another wing for the Bombshell I have.
